I'd go one further and say it's wrong to assume the most inefficient, expensive, and socially isolating form of infrastructure shouldn't be expected to be the d

I'd go one further and say it's wrong to assume the most inefficient, expensive, and socially isolating form of infrastructure shouldn't be expected to be the default. I get land capex is cheaper and distributed population is great for defensive posture against nuclear attacks and pandemics, but that doesn't mean that denser suburbs, small towns with strong centers, or indeed cities are less desirable than suburbia or rural areas by any means. Life naturally fills the ecosystem it finds itself in to carrying capacity. The sustainable limitations here are financial, ecological, and regulatory. I think we're hitting up against those constraints right now. Unless they want to pay us more money, we're going to have to sacrifice the environment or car centric regulations to continue growing. If we decide to just stop growing, then we either need changes in regulations to further disincentivize growth or allow a ton of suffering to happen.